What's your opinion on bringing back pre-33 coin denominations?

I could see a $2.50 as a dime, $5 for a 5, $10 for a quarter, and $20 for a half, maybe 40% as a commemorative set. I wish it could go backwards, take a $10 Indian to the bar/eatery and leave with a few Silver Dollars.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'd take extra silver dollars and ask if I could change them for the Indian. Retailers always need change.

 

Oh yeah, I would be looking in the register, no I want that one.

 

I would really like if I could change out silver dollars for an Indian. Could you imagine silver dollars that don't get confused with quarters, with a roll not weighing a pound?

I believe this could make the large denominations uncumbersome to carry around.

 

Many silver coins that were never released from the US Treasury were stored in government vaults until the 1950s through the 70s. It is well documented information, Morgan collectors know this well. Prior to that, there were some Morgans that were highly valuable. When the hoards were released, many thousands of mint state coins that never saw circulation were released to the public and coin brokers. It is common knowledge and easy to research. In fact, (and it is weird), certain years and mint marks are more common in MS condition than circulated. But that will never make the circulated ones more valuable, for obvious reasons.

 

No. The mintage was so low that those will always be scarce. I'm trying to remember but, I think the treasury did not mint very many coins between 1893 through 1895, and most of them were released right into circulation because they just didn't mint very many. Now why they didn't release old ones from vaults, I can't explain that one. I am talking about Morgans specifically, not other denominations.

 

I understand, but what I've posted isn't political, it is just stone cold hard facts about mintage numbers and how the US banned private ownership of gold for half a century. It is what it is.

 

Maybe this could be the age of looking through registers!

Probably a conversation in 2030:
"Well, I'll take the 2028-D half eagle. Wait- is that a 2026-S double eagle? I'll take that one and I'll pay you the difference."
"What's so special about the S mintmark, though?"
"Those are 40% silver semiquencentennial proofs. I could tell by the silver colored edges."
"Hmm. I thought that they were all clad."
"Yeah, except for these. The Mint made double eagles, half eagles, eagles, and fifth eagles."
"Wow, cool! How much melt is a 2026-S double eagle?"
"About $18."
"Well, I'm gonna be looking for those."

 

I was wrong about it being Nixon repealing the gold ban, it was Gerald Ford.


Executive Order 6102 is an executive order signed on April 5, 1933, by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt "forbidding the hoarding of gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates within the continental United States." The executive order was made under the authority of the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917, as amended by the Emergency Banking Act in March 1933.

The limitation on gold ownership in the United States was repealed after President Gerald Ford signed a bill legalizing private ownership of gold coins, bars, and certificates by an Act of Congress, codified in Pub. L.Tooltip Public Law (United States) 93–373,[1] which went into effect December 31, 1974.

And yes, from what I've read, you were only allowed to own $100 worth of face value gold $20 Eagles.

 

Owning just $100 worth of double eagles was a little over the limit. I mean, what would they do if they found a gold union nowadays? I'd love to have one as it'd be worth about $10,000 in melt.

Here's another 2030 conversation with the large denomination coins:

"Welcome to the casino! Did you know we now have a machine that accepts quarter eagles?"
"I actually need some quarter eagles. Do you have any in the register?"
"I've got some, yes. Want to look?"
"Why, yes!" (laughing)
"Is there any special ones you're looking for?"
"I'm looking for a 2027-CC privy mark. It is a silver strike made for collectors. Uhhhh... I'll take this 2025 instead of the new one."
"Hmm, seems like you love collecting!"
"I really do honestly. For old time's sake, though, don't ever show me a collection of silver double eagles. You'd have $200 worth turned into unions in a few seconds."

 

lol..........$100 face value. But I chuckled. Break out the diamond saw.

 

I know, right? $100 was a lot back in that day, but nowadays if you sold them, $10,000 could last you about 2 months. Heh, in 2030 you'd have to pay for a loaf of bread and a dozen of eggs with a double eagle.

 

Simple. No.

The cost to do so would not be acceptable to any person on the planet.

 

If you mean the cost of the coins, that would be reasonable as many people don't want to use the coins. I believe that larger denominations could do well, but the line should be drawn at double eagles.

 

The public has had a long tradition of preferring paper to coins. I can’t see $5, $10 and $20 coins getting a lot of use. In addition, each increase in value would require an increase in size and weight. That would make the $20 coin and maybe the $10 rather large.

 

The only way it would make sense would be to do it effectively as a revaluation -- cent-like dollars, nickel-like $5, dime-like $10, quarter-like $25.

And that would be an admission about the relative value of today's dollar that we'll never see from our political leaders.

 

I always liked Logic. I don't know why......

 

And then you get into the issue of people mixing up the coins with similar sizes and getting “cheated” as a result. I heard the grumbling when the SBA Dollar was similar in size to the quarter in the early 1980s.

 

The SBA dollar was a flop by the Mint in my opinion. Honestly they could've learned the lesson from the 20 cent piece, but then again the 20 cent piece could have been confused because of the same design.

 

One shouldn't have had anything to do with the other.